The second datejust with baby blue arabic numerals has always confused me. I understand what they are doing... and I know that the ferris wheel approach would look silly... but I just do not enjoy that organization of arabic numerals on the dial. It just looks wrong to my eyes. And this is PURELY a personal thing.

The second datejust with baby blue arabic numerals has always confused me. I understand what they are doing... and I know that the ferris wheel approach would look silly... but I just do not enjoy that organization of arabic numerals on the dial. It just looks wrong to my eyes. And this is PURELY a personal thing.

I vastly prefer the "straight up and down approach:"

This is what I meant by the ferris wheel approach (not what you posted earlier). Each numeral hangs straight, like a ferris wheel car that pivots as the wheel rotates. What you posted shows how the numeral orientation radiates from the center and flips as it gets to the lower semi-circle.

I think it is the font of the 9 that is the problem... if you are going to ferris wheel, you have to have a font where a nine is clearly a nine.

A true ferris wheel would have every number in the same direction as 12. Most clock faces are done like this, so it's not novel - however the calendar has so many more numbers, it might be too crowded.

The second datejust with baby blue arabic numerals has always confused me. I understand what they are doing... and I know that the ferris wheel approach would look silly... but I just do not enjoy that organization of arabic numerals on the dial. It just looks wrong to my eyes. And this is PURELY a personal thing.

yes, i agree. i was just saying that if you are going to be bending numbers, that is the way i like it.

it seems that almost everyone does the sideways 9 on a perp cal and they all look like a 6 to me. AP seems to be the only one i saw in my quick search that does it the way i think looks nicer and makes more sense. i think the top one is a fantastic looking dial all around. very congruent and fluid.

I think it is the font of the 9 that is the problem... if you are going to ferris wheel, you have to have a font where a nine is clearly a nine.

I much prefer the charm of the hand-lettered style in the second example. The nine on the first dial is equally indistinguishable from a six, and Times New Roman is not something I actually want to see anywhere on a watch. Its presence is by far my least favourite feature of my Reverso GMT.

I actually do prefer a certain amount of "flipping" on numerals as I refer to the date function often and would like it to be "right side up." Of course this is just a matter of training your brain, just like you have to kind of teach yourself how to read the subdial layout of any multi-subdial calendar anyway. Most ferris wheels flip between 23 and 25, for example, and that doesn't bother me. It's just the "9" that looks so much like a "6" that niggles, just a wee bit, especially since you could have flipped it at "11" and it would be fine.

I actually do prefer a certain amount of "flipping" on numerals as I refer to the date function often and would like it to be "right side up." Of course this is just a matter of training your brain, just like you have to kind of teach yourself how to read the subdial layout of any multi-subdial calendar anyway. Most ferris wheels flip between 23 and 25, for example, and that doesn't bother me. It's just the "9" that looks so much like a "6" that niggles, just a wee bit, especially since you could have flipped it at "11" and it would be fine.

I think so - especially if the font used for "11" basically renders the flipping "irrelevant" (it won't even look like a flip if the 11 looked like this - "II" - as it does in the Patek 3970 and many others).